Clifton

Note that this proposal includes re-opening Brockley Lane station (closed for over 100 years!) to form an interchange with the existing Brockley station. This could offer useful connections from Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill.

Try this: http://www.championhillproposals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Meadow-Dulwich-Exhibition-boards-web.pdf

A limited edition International Women's Day scarf will be on sale at this Saturday's home game v Dartford. https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099350013954740226 Profits to women's sport and charities. Tickets are available at https://www.seetickets.com/event/dulwich-hamlet-vs-dartford/champion-hill-stadium-london/1317403

I understand that TFL's reasons for not having a temporary stop seem dodgy, but I don't think it really matters. The temporary northbound stop which was placed on Copeland Road (approx opposite Blackpool Road) when Rye Lane was closed for a long time 10+ years ago was actually only marginally nearer to the Bournemouth Road/Rye Lane junction than is the Nigel Road stop. I soon discovered, given the time the bus took between Nigel Road and the temporary stop, that it was quicker to walk to the station from Nigel Road. Any southbound temporary stop would of course be a long distance from the station, since the diversion doesn't use Copeland Road going south. And walking along Rye Lane to Nigel Road is surely much safer than walking through the back streets.

Appears to be OK now.

Fire brigade are currently (11:25 Fri) attending a gas leak in Piermont Road. People in Piermont Road are being asked to leave their homes.

I have used Dell Autos on Hansler Road for many years. They have always been excellent.

Below is the correct link for making representations about this proposal. (The one in the original post above doesn't work.) Click on the link and go to ?make a representation? ? then ?contact us?. http://app.southwark.gov.uk/Licensing/LicPremisesAppliedDetails.asp?systemkey=861145

It seems to me that the real issue with South London's rail transport is not about whether it's actually under the ground (though I accept the points about tunnelling above), but rather whether it follows the London Underground (Tube) model. Lots of the "tube" lines north of the river aren't underground, but they follow a different approach from those to the south. The lines (with a few exceptions) don't go very far, and aren't shared with lines that do (though they may run alongside). The pattern of service is standard (making the Tube map a lot simpler than the train map south of the river), and the trains run frequently. Trains are typically arranged to run through the centre, rather than stopping on the edge of it. This is all represented clearly on the Tube map that everyone knows, and the effect is that people believe that the Tube works, so they use it. Because they use it, it flourishes. Trains south of the river aren't so clearly represented and are, in most cases, not so frequent and not so standard, and they feel (and to some extent are, partly because some of them go so far) more complex to come to understand. The result is that people don't use them as much as they use the Tube, so they are neglected. (I know the trains seem heavily used because they are full, but that reflects the service frequency as much as the people numbers.) The relatively new Ginger line (the Overground from Highbury & Islington to Clapham Junction, West Croydon, New Cross and Crystal Palace) is an example of the Tube-ised model which would benefit South London immensely. As happened when the North London Line was Tube-ised, the switching of existing lines to the Tube model has transformed the service and dramatically increased usage. Almost that entire network was built on existing or previously mothballed lines (I think the curve including Shoreditch High Street is the only exception). New, clean, secure trains and the Tube model (and, critically, putting it on the Tube map) caused people to adopt it, and it's a great success. It seems that what we need is not lots of digging on a Bakerloo line extension (though I'm happy for that to happen as well), but the much simpler and cheaper approach of Tube-ising more lines. For example, if the Sevenoaks via Otford line were diverted at Bromley to run fast into Victoria (no doubt delighting users from Kent), we could Tube-ise the Catford Loop line and transform the quality of service on the London section. I realise I'm oversimplifying enormously by leaving out lots of practical problems, but doesn't this approach have promise?

I suspect the only shops who would be concerned would be those that want to use the space in question for their business - typically restaurants and caf?s. Outside The Galleon, by the traffic lights, there used to be a rather good greengrocer's hut. The pavement in that area has never been right since it was removed.

The match did indeed go ahead, and Dulwich won 2-1. The crowd was 1,828 which, while it means the ground wasn't actually full (capacity is 3,000) is still brilliant for a game at this level on a cold winter's day against a tiny club from a distance away. Dulwich now lead Billericay (the moneybags club) by 2 points, but Billericay inconveniently have four games in hand. Everyone else is miles back, though Folkestone (11 points adrift) do have three games in hand. Dulwich's next home game is against Leiston on the 23rd, by which time the table will be a bit more meaningful as each of Billericay and Folkestone will have used up two of their games in hand. The need to continue to show support and fill the club's coffers remains - take a break from Xmas shopping and be there on the 23rd.

Interesting to hear bsand's view that Forest Hill Road isn't in East Dulwich. Very useful thinking. On the same basis, the forum shouldn't carry threads referring to Crystal Palace Road. We could also exclude Chesterfield Grove and the other Derbyshire streets, plus Trossachs, Glengarry and Tarbet. And people in Delft Way, Deventer Crescent and Hilversum Crescent should be made to post their issues on a Dutch forum. All in all, a fine idea - should prevent EDF overload.

Yes, agree entirely. My last sentence was meant to get across that it's hardly surprising that Hamlet find themselves in this kind of struggle, when a club at the same level playing in a small country town would not.

Meadow do not own DHFC, but they do own the ground. This presumably means that they can represent DHFC's trading position in whatever way suits them, by defining the amount charged for the ground and related services accordingly. Unless they add information on those charges to their statement, readers cannot verify the claim of insolvency which that statement contains. Re the comments on Dulwich's high gate income relative to other non-league clubs, note that many of those clubs have benefactors, though the funding provided is not on the scale of Billericay's cash mountain. Very few indeed fit the normal model of "going concerns". Also, very few if any play on a site with the potential development value of Champion Hill (if planning concerns can be resolved, of course).

You could try the Orpington Golf Centre. http://www.mytimeactive.co.uk/orpington Two courses, Cray Valley and Ruxley. From where you've played before I suggest you try Ruxley. It initially seems to be a very short course (five par threes in the front nine, par 32), but then goes off into the country in the back nine, which is par 37 with only one par three. Not great condition, but some challenging holes, and normally not busy.

Finishing third is a great advantage because it would get Hamlet a home play off semi final, and just possibly a home final (if the 5th team wins at the 2nd in the semi). Let's all get there on Monday and help them home. Worth mentioning also that Hamlet have following today's results (barring unrealistic goal difference swings in the last two games) qualified for the playoffs, though we could still finish as low as 5th. (This is because the 4th and 5th teams have yet to play each other, so can't both pass us.)

Won 5-0 against Merstham today, with a crowd of 1,564 - astonishing for this level, given that the opponents brought very few. Dulwich now have on paper a really good chance of making the playoffs, but need to take advantage of their several games in hand. This can be hard because fixtures pile up - e.g. Hamlet are now at home on 20th, 22nd and 25th. Let's all get behind them at those games!

Hamlet or Macclesfield will play Tranmere Rovers in the semi final (at home in the first leg)

I have used the Forest Hill Road surgery for over 30 years, and would recommend it without hesitation. No problems in getting appointments for non-urgent issues, and no problems in being seen urgently when necessary. I do remember a period when some of the receptionists needed a little coaching on dealing with people, but that was a long time ago and was fixed. (And .... just to pre-empt any questioning comments ..... I don't work there, and I don't have any contact other than practice visits with anyone who does.)